It appears the NRA has a death wish.

We need to remove laws that have infringed on the right to carry. and take another look at allowing SSRI pills to be used in our society. i would much rather have Lanza fidgeting,instead of shooting.. calling for Laws to solve a problem where everything the person did was Illegal is to ignore what happen completely. background checks? we have those and the Victim passed hers, Assault Weapons Ban? been banned since 1987. no Assault weapon was used in the Crime. Automatics? banned in 1987. no Automatic was used. us Rational Americans have given up our Second Amendment right to be just as well armed as the US army. we have given up our right to Nukes,Tanks,Fighter Jets,Submarines,Destroyers,Torpedos,Gernades, and yes even Automatic weapons. and now you New Speak Control freaks want to target Semi-Automatics? just insulting to the Hundreds of Millions of people that have been killed because they couldn't defend themselves. Never Forget . in 1956 Cambodia passed gun control, by 1975 they were being dragged out of their homes and stuck in Rural Plantations and forced to work, and killed in mass, raped, etc.. this kind of thing can and has happened. so "Civilized Society" needs to stop being so UnCivil with their demands of Full Disarmament of Civilians. while the Government has every law needed to become a violent dictatorship, NDAA,DHS,Patriot Act, 30 thousand drones and 1.6 billion bullets.

Put armed security guards in America.

Armed guards in EVERY school is not the answer in preventing mass murder. They can (and have) occurred in a variety of public places. A ban on assault weapons is absolutely essential, along with more rigid regulation of weapons at the point of sale.

Put a police officer at every school in the USA/

Forget about what people are saying and look at what they are actually doing.
Armed guards are present anywhere there is something valuable to protect or to keep an important person from harm.
Politicians, banks, museums, air ports and so on have armed guards.
Are these all more valuable than our children? If an assault weapon ban is in place will the president reduce his security staff?
We need to open our eyes and see what is really being done instead if believing what we are told.
If you want to protect something or someone you have to physically do it. Not just pass a law and hope for the best.

Well, actually that comment was a mistake, but.......yet, I think the security measures we have in place are not working. Remember the days, when there were armed security guards at every bank? I realize that mass shootings have occurred in a variety of places, and yes, it can happen anywhere at any time. However, if we can take extra steps to protect children in school, why on earth wouldn't we?

Columbine High School had an armed guard.
Virginia Tech had their own police force.
Ft Hood was a military base.
...

Armed guards outside the school building - YES
Ban on assault weapons - YES
Coming up with technological solutions (RFID chips or something) - YES
A focus on getting children to participate in organized religion - YES
Move the playing and sale age up for violent games (perhaps 25) - YES

Why the organized religion? Because parents who are "spiritual" are not going to teach the basic moral and ethical lessons like "don't kill people". I often find people who say they are "spiritual" are basically saying they are lazy. It takes a bit of work to participate in organized religion.

I would also propose to Mr LaPierre that, if a mentally ill young man had been unable to readily get his hands on assault weapons and magazines of multiple rounds of ammunition, 26 people might still be alive. My parents got into the tea party organization a couple years ago and shortly thereafter started accumulating guns and paranoia. As far as i know, the last time my dad had a firearm was in the 1950s when he was in the army. He has become obsessed with guns and drives a couple hours to go to sales event dotted around NC, where they live. This is not what 80 year olds should be spending their time on- and it doesn't comfort me to know he has a horde of guns in their house, either.

The 'Gun' problem is multi-faceted because there are numerous variables and no one solution will reduce this violence. A few variables: illegal guns, automatic and semi-automatic weapons, mental illness, open and unguarded schools and shopping centers, city vs rural issues, the 2nd Amendment which does not mention guns, immediate solutions vs long term, the NRA, and many other issues. Immediately, we should place visibly armed and uniformed Army troops at each school (bring them home from Afghanistan) and each locked side door must be guarded by volunteers such as parents ( train them and give them Tasers), allow stop and search of anyone approaching a school. Try getting into the Senate building without being searched. We are now paying our troops for an expensive war that could be fought with Drones. I would not mind at all seeing a US soldier guarding each school in Highland Park, all Washington DC buildings like the Supreme Court are guarded 24 hours a day by government paid personnel, why not guard our kids? It's time Americans awaken and realize we live in a violent country and much more needs to be done. We already accept protection, imagine driving on our highways without armed troopers! Would anyone want this? Government must substantially increase its visibility by displaying an armed show of force in this daily tragedy. Gun violence will not disappear on its own!

With the right to carry guns, we will have a much more polite society... You don't see anyone starting problems at the police department, do you ?

Ridiculous

We need to protect our children; and the schools need to protect our children, as well.

Hank, you do have a point but politicians still get shot, banks and museums still get robbed. I fell that putting more guns into a place with young children isn't the best solution. It might help, but we also know that kids can be resourceful, coercive, and love to find things they aren't supposed to have.

At some point I feel that we have to ask ourselves what kind of country we want to live in. This isn't a third world country. We shouldn't have to be armed everywhere we go and get past a security detail to go to a movie, school, or out to eat. We don't have a country where there is a coup on the government every other year. This isn't Somalia. How have we not come up with better ideas to keep people safe/keep criminals from harming others?

If arming everyone was really the only option that worked, wouldn't banks not get robbed? Wouldn't criminals not shoot other armed criminals? Wouldn't there be little to zero crime in all the concealed carry states if people were truly afraid that someone might be armed? I have said before that it might work as a band aid, but people will still get shot in large volume. We have a large population and more guns per capita than almost any other country.

I believe that the issue should be mental health and research, that said, until the bad guys don't have guns, I believe the only reasonable solution to protecting ones family and property is by having a firearm. All major universities and colleges have security staff, and I know of many high schools that do as well, why not have some kind of deputized person(s) in place? Heck, I think there are even deputized people in place at the Skokie Public Library, however I don't think they're authorized to carry a sidearm.

Easiest solution: Charge $5000.00 per bullet!

I would like to propose if a mentally ill young man did not have hands, 26 people might still be alive. Without hands, he would be unable to get them on assault weapons. Any new legislation will have to address banning either mentally ill people or their hands.

Guns are an addiction
Like ALL addictions, the addict can no more envision his life without his addiction than one could envision living without air to breathe. Assault weapons are WMD and every owner of one should be on the terrorist watch list.
They are not muskets and the owners are NOT in the militia. No where in any sane interpretation of 2 Amed.
Is 2 intended to protect one from the gov.
This nation needs to stop enabling its gun addicts

Ed I like what you said here and agree with you. All except for more rigid regulations at the point of sale. It seems that the people buying the weapons are doing so legally and their background checks come back fine. It is the people having access to those guns (I.e.) family members or strangers that is the problem. Also, how does more rigid regulations at the point of sale stop some gun collector from setting up a garage sale and just selling his guns to anyone? Or via the Internet? No background checks done there. The answer is...... ban the guns, let them be for hunting animals not people. That is what other civilized countries do. It is illegal to own a hand gun in Canada, and last year 50 people were killed by guns while in America over 10,000 people were........just saying.

We have more to protect than our children's bodies, Do we want to inculcate in them the sick paranoia that holds too many Americans in its grip? How about using the tax dollars that would be spent on armed guards and guns instead on better schools, books, and healthcare? Now there's a thoughtl Instead of blowing away human beings, let's really protect our children by educationg them, caring for their health--physical and mental--and ending the belligerence of our military, something they are absorbing daily as part of our distorted list of social priorities. 

If only the first victim was armed...oh wait. It's time to get large capacity clips and military weapons off of our streets, and I say this as a FOID card holder and gun owner.

Should we put military on the streets with M-16's? How much is too much? Tanks, soldiers on every corner. Troops marching in formation in malls.

Anybody who wants more guns in schools is either being intellectually dishonest or has never been in a school environment. This ridiculous suggestion belongs on the pages of the Onion, not as the stance of one of the largest lobbying organizations in the country.

Today's Chicago Tribune headline "5 injured in overnight shootings" says it all.
Ban all guns

Armed guards belong in some schools, but not all schools. We need to get to the causes of violence and not just on the aftermath. Where is the righteous anger over the purveyors of the violence triggers? Why are we not going after the peddlers of gore and violence in video games and movies. Quentin Tarentino actually said that displays of violence are a catharsis and release in an interview after the Newtown massacre. Sick man.

That picture is very misleading and should be taken down. If guns make you safe, why would there need to be at least a dozen guns to protect just one person? And furthermore why would secret service use metal detectors at events like presidential inaugurations? The answer is that guns and armed officers cannot prevent random acts of violence. The attacker always has the advantage of surprise. That is why there are so many people required to protect one person like the president. They have to be watching everywhere and everyone. So imagine how little protection one person would provide at a school where hundreds or thousands of kids go. The only way to protect our society is to not allow access to semi automatic weapons or weapons with large capacity magazines or assault rifles etc...

Is this the only way to prove that we are free? Or should it be by the way we behave as a society?
We are the most violent society even though we go out there in the world to teach other countries and societies how to be free and we also condone violence.
No weapons in the society is the best way to prevent gun violence not more weapons.

A gun is the most cost effective way to protect something. As usual, the poll is missing the best option, "Train and arm at least one administrator in the front office of each school". That would be the most cost effective way to get this job done. Banning certain types of guns and magazine sizes will do nothing.

Mental illness was the real cause of this, but I guess our society can't waste a crisis and has to make the most of this chance to score political points against their long time opponents. I'm getting sick of that.

No, and NO. I cannot answer this poll because all three answers are wrong. My answer is NO armed guards. The more you make people feel like criminals, the more criminal they become. Do you enjoy a trip to the airport these days? I refuse to fly because I am not a criminal, and I should not be made to feel like one. Children do not have a choice whether to go to school or not. This in itself is wrong, but not in question here. If they don't have a choice, then they are forced to feel like a criminal EVERY day they go to school. I cannot imagine what that feels like.

My answer to the second part is NO. Getting guns "off the street" is not going to help anyone. It is hard to compare our country or even our county to another one. There are opposing studies for everything "scientific", but there is definitely a reason the forefathers of THIS country fought hard to have the right to bear arms. They were a lot smarter than the average American today.

The bottom line is this: Treat/Teach your children with respect, and NEVER take pharmaceutical except in emergency or acute situations!

Timothy Mcveigh Didn't need a background check to purchase fertalizer, racing fuel, and rent a box truck. The Al qaida didn't need a background check to purchase plane tickets.

Crazy people are going to find a way. Firearms are responsible for fewer fatalities than Non firearm weapons are every year. Baseball bats are the most commonly used object in an assault every year according to the FBI. Where is the ASSAULT BAT BAN?

Criminals are in favor of More Gun Control / Gun Bans and are against concealed Carry. It only makes it easier for them to attack / steal from innocent people.

Law abiding citizens are in favor of concealed carry for protection purposes. Police take too long to respond. States that have recently added concealed carry have seen a drop in violent crimes. Countries that have banned firearms have seen an increase in violent crimes.

As far as the topic of armed guards in every school. It is a great idea. I Would feel much safer knowing my child spends his days in a secured building vs an unguarded building.

1. Chicago has some of the most draconian gun laws in the country, so, obviously there is no gun crime in Chicago.
2. When the Federal "Assault" weapons ban expired there was a similar but stricter law which remained in place in Connecticut and is still in place today. Look how well it worked to protect the 26 who died.
3. Whenever an incident like Sandy Hook happens a hue and cry goes up to "do something" which the politicians proceed to use to double down on firearm prohibitions which didn't work in the first place.
4. As a society we have become so used to lying to ourselves about personal responsibility that we eagerly buy into the fantasy that some politician, somewhere has an easy answer... if only we surrender more of our Constitutional rights.
5. The call by LaPietra for police in every school ignores the fact that police have no obligation to protect anybody, (check out the Supreme Court ruling on this). Just another meaningless "feel good" attempt to "do something".

Advocates on both sides of this argument are so busy mouthing the the "paty line" platitudes that is impossible, apparently, to have any thoughtful or meaningful dialogue that could address the problem and, perhaps lead to some useful action.

Absolutely not. More guns is not a solution. It will only add.to the problem!

I posted this on another thread and still stand by it. I don't have a problem paying for armed security in my local schools, just as long as it isn't some overweight, retired cop who would have to drop his donut before pulling his weapon and would keel over from a heart attack after running 10 feet.

An armed guard would have stopped the Newtown shooter before he broke into the building and all those children and adults would still be alive.

Yes.

Here is a thought. Maybe these lunatics wouldn't go out on a shooting rampage for attention if the media didn't cover the events non stop for weeks after the shootings. I think this is partially what is fueling these sick people. Crazy people and Media Kill!!!

Identify and treat the mentally ill. And, check out what has been done in Scotland, Japan, Australia, etc. Banning military weapons and ammo sales to the public helps the problem tremendously.

Armed guards, yes! Wherever children are...every school, park, mall, movie theatre, gas station, street, beach, underwater, in the air...until a mentally unstable, $10/hour armed guard loses it!

That is a local and state decision based on budgetary concerns, like an add'l crossing guard, or anything else. We in IL, unfortunately are dealing with a checkbook that is out of checks, so the checks of future generations are being written.

With respect to all the gun-related discussions this week, tell all to use real facts when reviewing the topic. This is a good reference:

https://sites.google.com/site/gcpolicyus/self---protection/statistics

The city of Chicago is a shining example, with some of the strictest gun laws in the nation, as to how we are unable to enforce the laws, and how they were able to reach a 400+ gun-homicide crime level by late October of this year.

Guns are one thing but I am more worried about nuclear weapons in the hands of the Iranians and North Koreans. Talk ablout mass killings. Wow! Nuclear weapons, rockets to deliver them, religious insanity and hatred. What law are we going to pass to control that?

I agree with you steve , 100 percent ....

I always find it fascinating that people in everyday society that go to and from their jobs, stores, friends' homes, etc. sit back and play monday morning quarterback. I am absolutely a liberal person. However, having worked in this field for many years now, I absolutely believe that we need concealed carry and armed guards in schools. People, let's get real. The criminals are not the ones abiding by any type of gun law and they certainly aren't the ones caring about education. I'm sorry, but statistics speak for themselves. You can't falsify UCR coding. It's either a crime or it isn't. Crime has gone down in every single state with concealed carry laws. Enough said.

I do NOT want guns in my school! If you think a bunch of armed people would have saved more people in that Colorado theater, I think you are deluding yourself. I think everyone in that theater would have died as honest people would have been shooting at the dark at everyone else with and without a gun. If you think that somehow your school, your church/synagogue/mosque, your work place or your shopping mall is somehow immune from the possibility of what has happened all too often in this country, you are mistaken. The more guns are readily available and the more clips those guns hold, the more fatalities there will continue to be. We do need to address mental illness but we absolutely need to begin with an assault weapons ban. There is NO reason for any civilian to have these.

Homeschooling and private schooling (with protection) is starting to sound a little better everyday.

Putting armed guards at the schools is not a stop gap measure. An armed guard can be killed by a gunman, so where is the protection there? It just may slow them down a bit, but not necessarily stop them.

There is no need for semi-automatic guns for citizens. We can protect ourselves adequately with regular guns. What should also be made nation-wide is a lock up law, which won't stop these tradgedies, but could have probably prevented the Sandy Hook attack. Parents not locking up their guns should be held for criminal charges.

Joyce is is very clear that you know very little about firearms except that you are afraid of them.
Properly trained persons who carry firearms know that you don not indiscrimiately discharge that firearm without being certain of their target. As is well known in the military, you perform as you train.
You are correct in your assessment that no place is immune from the possibilty of these attacks. What creating "gun free" zones guarantees is a plethora of victims unable to protect themselves.
I would like to know upon what "facts" you base your statement that the more guns available lead to more fatalities, (by the way, the piece that holds the vartridges is a magazine. A clip is what holds your hair in place or papers together).
The buzz word "assault weapon" is meaningless. Any object with which a person can be dealt bodily harm is an assault weapon, (baseball bats, fists, frying pans, volkswagons, etc).
As to your last statement, I refer you to the 2nd. amendment to the US Constitution.

If there is not going to be a law immediately banning all guns then we need an armed guard at every school!!! Kids need to be protected end of story!!!!!!

Here is a physiologcial realty...an armed security guard, or even police officer - who dos not regularly engage in shooting while under attack, regardless of training, will not have the physical or emotional tools necessary to fire a clean shot when confronted/surprised by a rogue gunman in a school, mall or otherwise. As humans, when sudden fear imposes itself, the blood rushes to our vital organs - rendering our motor skills unreliable. Only trained professional that have engaged in combat on a regular basis, over numerous encounters, have learned how to over come these physiological responses. Someone tho fires a gun on a shooting range is not being pushed into a response initiated by fear. So - unless we want to turn our country into a Military state of armed, trained professionals in every public place - we need better answers to our problems. The NRA represents gun retailers and manufacturers. It is their JOB to promote the use and sale of guns. They will never suggest we diminish our production or sales of weapons. Anyone waiting for that is going to be disappointed. That said - this needs to become an issue not about what the NRA represents - but what the PEOPLE of this nation represent. I think most of us can agree that changes are needed - no longer can we suggest that we be prisoners to the huge political machine that exists. Together, as a united front, we CAN make a difference that serves and protects without removing the 2nd Amendment.

So we have Grover Norquist sitting on the NRA board. They want to add over 100,000 armed police. Yet, Grover would not allow a penny in taxes to pay for this to get through congress. Hummm? So the answer is to take the Medicare and Medicaid payments that go only to Tea Baggers or any NRA member that supports this and use that money to pay for this. I'm going out on a limb here, but I'm guessing they would scream if any of this cost them a dime. The answer is not to arm our teachers either. Make owning a gun at least as hard as it is to obtain a license to cut hair. And end second hand gun sales that don't require any wait or background check. Oh, wait Grover is against that, too. Funny how this man who has never received a vote in his life has so much control over all of ours.

Yes! They absolutely should be in our school it's the only way our children can be safe.
The specs I'd like them to have are M16 red dot sight with that akimbo g18's to get it done at close range and maybe some flash bangs to surprise them and for Halloween parties. Obviously, you put that semtex on no need to explain that. What about the perks you ask? Don't worry I got you they'll rep slight of hand, quickdraw, and some sitrep just in case the villains lay down some claymores.

I am definitely not a gun lover, never want to own a gun. Don't have friends with guns. But? Something needs to change with the security of schools. What is it?
When we go to work we have swipe cards to get in our offices. Maybe thats what we need but then there would be that ONE person who has a swipe card with a gun in a school. And yanno what? no one can answer "what if" type of questions. If a pyscho knew that every school had a police officer / security person, it might keep them from breaking in and killing. No way to know.
Laurie Dann - 24 years ago, and we are still "talking" about how to protect our kids. If you don't know who she was, she went into Hubbard Woods Elementary in Winnetka, shot & killed 1 boy, a first grader. Wounded 3 boys and 2 girls, on May 20, 1988. Nothing has changed. Regular gun = loaded gun. And no one walks around with an "unloaded gun". So, it all ready HAS happened here.

All these guards may protect the kid's bodies, but what will protect their minds? Living in a police state is not what our founding fathers envisioned. To protect their minds, get rid of the stupid video games and films that show killing people as something acceptable. I also say, bring back the death penalty wherever it was revoked. The extreme example is the screwball who killed dozens of people in Norway, bragged about it, and was given a life sentence thinking he may get out of that somehow.

I just don't understand why we should not have armed guards or police officers in our school. I believe we should have a police officer in every school, while it will cost a lot is that not worth all the innocent lives that were lost in Connecticut or anywhere else. While I have no statistics to back this up, most shootings occur at places that guns are banned. Why? Because the shooter does not have to fear being shot himself. We need more armed police officer or security guards where guns are banned.

Perhaps A guard using a security system to monitor the doors and windows. Probably would only need system installed for 1St floor of any school.

I agree with the NRA, we need to protect our children in this violent society. Why do we think that additional gun laws will decrease crime? Look at Chicago, the strictest gun laws, yet we see killings every weekend. Law abiding citizens have no guns while the gang bangers run the neighborhoods. Schools need to start teaching values and not a permissive mentality. Schools need to stop feeding negative books on violence, sex and begin to teach abou the greatness of our history.

We have guards at the airport, mall, high school, college, medical schools, hospitals, law schools, train stations, ports, but we shouldn't have them in elementary schools?

There is no full proof solution, it's about lowering the odds. Thankfully you're still more likely to get struck by lightning while being eaten by a great white shark, than be involved in a massacre like we've seen. Why not lower the odds even further?

Z, well said. I like the thought of: lowering the odds.

if Security isn't the Answer then i demand the Secret Service and Capitol Police, and every other TSA etc. to go get a new job. long before us Common Americans suffer from more laws that kill jobs and manufacturing in America. let them put there words into action. Guns don't make you safe. so why do we have the Secret Service? the Federal Reserve doesn't need to have Armed Guards .. let alone with Assault Weapons, Fully Automatic Military Rifles are not needed by DynaCorp of New York or BlackWater of Virgina. or any other numberof 'security forces" of Rich people who can afford to smooth over that paper work and curtail laws. and clearly obama will stop arming Libyians and Syrians, and Mexicans.. clearly obama will not be using American Tax Dollars to wage war on Mali. clearly if Guns are bad. and must be Controlled. the Control will start with his Armed Defenders. he can go get his own mail like Lincoln did. RIGHT?

This discussion is as nuts as the NRA! The function of the NRA is to SELL GUNS & AMMO, NOTHING ELSE! They are the political lobby group to do anything & EVERYTHING to increase the sales of the gum manufacturing companies. Listen to what that "dummy" from the NRA said in his "preprinted speech" & never got off script, even after two people displayed those anti NRA signs. If anybody viewed the Sunday news shows where the news hosts attempted to ask the NRA "talking heads" some other options like closing those open gun markets, only replyed with the same "prepared talking points"! Maybe the govenment & news media should investigate just how much monies the gun companies pay the NRA???

I like the NRA's idea of starting a national database of the mentally ill. They can start with their own membership.

More shots fired on Dodge, lodges in mattress of little girl, family feud is ongoing

Does anybody think that all this talk today about guns and gun laws and violence is going to make anything happen? It's all just talk and my guess is that not one darn thing will change. The kids in Chicago will continue to kill each other; criminals will continue to break into the homes of senior citizens and rape the women and then kill them and their husbands. Nothing is going to change, especially the constitution allowing people to carry guns. Why do people have to carry concealed weapons? So that someone can't sneak up on them and kill them before they get a chance to kill the person trying to kill them? It's all nuts.

While we are at it, why not ban unemployment, poverty, racism and obesity. Perhaps Durbin can package the entire bill together with guns, and then he can bash all who oppose. After all, anyone in opposition just doesn't have a heart.

McCloud, unemployment, poverty, racism or obesity didn't walk into a class room of 6 and 7 year olds and mow them down with a bushwacker.

No one is saying ban guns, just assault weapons.

The second Amendment reads: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

It doesn't specify our rights to own spitballs, guns, machine guns, chemical weapons or thermonuclear missiles. So we have to use a bit of Thomas Payne common sense when it comes to the second amendment. That's for all you armchair patriots and History channel subscribers.

I reiterate:

Armed guards outside the school building - YES
Ban on assault weapons - YES
Coming up with technological solutions (RFID chips or something) - YES
A focus on getting children to participate in organized religion - YES
Move the playing and sale age up for violent games (perhaps 25) - YES

Why the organized religion? Because parents who are "spiritual" are not going to teach the basic moral and ethical lessons like "don't kill people". I often find people who say they are "spiritual" are basically saying they are lazy. It takes a bit of work to participate in organized religion.

Before all the anti religious go crazy:

I didn't mention religion so that you could believe in a deity, I mentioned it because of it's structured nature. Parents don't have the time or even the forethought to actually mouth the words "you should not kill people". At least in a organized religion children would learn these basic lessons. I'll bet you ask 100 kids today and 99 will say they were never actually told those words directly.

Let me digress a bit, what is so wrong in believing in the message of "Love and Peace" from the ultimate liberal hippie Jesus. Even if you're an atheist or are just plain lazy (spiritual) what is so wrong with children participating in something that is such a central part of our western culture. View it as a part of culture and not specifically religion. At the very least they may learn something we all understand to be basic civil human morality. Although I will admit that it's western morality.

It's kind of like Natalie Portman. She doesn't practice Judaism cause she's religious, she does it because it's part of her culture and she wants her child to grow up within that culture.

The police will not be there to protect me when some crazy comes along. I have a constitutional right to be able to defnd myself and my family. When will people learn that it is impossible to control the actions of another person. I can only control my actions. My personal safety is my obligation. The government should not be allowed to choose the method I use to defend myself.

BTW - I'm not sure about other schools in Buffalo Grove, but I know that both Cooper Middle School and Buffalo Grove High School have full time police officers. I've always thought this was a good idea. I cannot underestand why some any seem against it.

LaPierre=Devil marketing

446 school age children shot in Chicago so far this year with strongest gun laws in country – media silent.So why isn’t this news worthy? Is it because it would embarrass those anti second amendment nuts who brag about Chicago’s tough gun laws? Is it because most of the kids who were shot and killed were minorities? Or is it because the corrupt media doesn’t want to show Chicago in a bad light? Amazingly, no Obama crocodile tears either

illegal/legal guns sold "legally" to criminals etc..., cross-border etc...NRA "laws" don't work!

~100k public schools+100,000+80k/officer=$$$ can anyone tell me???
you are the same people that were duped into trillion dollar wars to solve our foreign policy/oil addiction issues.
NRA=devil worship

stop sending me updates

By the way, armed police have been present at Niles West and Niles North high schools for years.

The question you have to ask is when should the police be there? In advance to prevent or at least minimize shootings or after the shootings to collect evidence and explain what happened so we can comment about what should have been done?

Criminals do not obey the law(s). People with deep emotional and/or psycological problems are living in thier own reality at this point. they are not capable of rational thaught. So, how is any law going help prevent someone that snaped or a criminal who's bent braeking law(s) going to solve this problem?

Banning automatic weapons of any type will not end this problem, but it sure will slow down the crazies out there. There is no justification for allowing these kinds of weapons to be sold and distributed among the populace. Where does self protection
end? Do we need guards to guard the guards? These kinds of mass killings did not exist in America 100 years ago. Something has changed. Poisoning the minds of
young people is more acceptable in the form of violent toys, movies, internet games, etc., so it is no surprise when these kids start acting out their fantacies. Like pornography, we will never be able to stamp this out, but again we can take measures to reduce it's influence. I suggest we take all these gun lovers and offer them service in Afganistan, where they can act out their fantacies and put it towards a practical benefit.

Taken as a whole, the comments here are a pretty good view of the gun debate in this country and why it is so difficult to make meaningful progress in gun control. Gun advocates tell us that the second amendment protects their right to own guns and that these assault weapons (sometimes called semi-automatic) are really no different than the guns our grandfathers owned.

I am not a gun owner but grew up in an area where most were hunters and guns were a way of life. Today I live in a heavily populated urban area where the view of guns tends to be very different. I believe I understand the challenge of resolving these cultural difference. What I cannot understand is how the NRA comes out after an unthinkable tragedy and their only solution is armed guards in schools. Somehow, they missed their opportunity to make a difference and have relegated themselves to that of an out-of-touch laughingstock.

Thirty round magazines and hollow point bullets are not my grandfathers weapons but technology for killing in an extremely efficient manner. 26 people dead in 3 minutes was not caused by a "regular old hunting rifle". I am not advocating for the elimination of all guns but rather the elimination of these high capacity weapons of war.

Clyde, no you are not my "equal", now go back to your John Wayne Xmas movie!

While it might seem, at first thought, that having armed constabulary guard our schoolchildren would be ideal, I highly doubt those protecting our young would possess the steady aim and coolness under duress of a James Butler Hickock or a John Henry Holliday.

No offense to our dear village's police force, but there are few among them who I would trust responding to a situation that involved such stress and such high stakes, especially when their (little- or un-used) marksmanship was being depended on.

And even less so would I place my hopes in the lacking and even-less-practiced talents of a security-man who would likely be no better-prepared than one of those bumbling and blustering Keystone Kops who patrol "shopping centers" or "malls."

My fear of armed attacks on schools is very real, yet the damage that would be done by the shamefully incompetent in response could be greater and all the more tragic in the end.

one of the beauties of freedom of speech is that some people think that they are equal in there ability...but in a democracy people can listen and see who's cookie crumbles...now we shall see who sets the precious down long enough to espouse their cooky religion ala LaPierre (Pepe Le Pew)...

Why not hire retired Police Officers as school security Officers? Years of training and experience already paid for, and most of them would probably be willing to take a relatively low salary in order to get medical insurance.

There is an armed on-duty police officer at the school attended by Rahm's kids.

Rahm's response to the NRA's suggestion to put armed guards in each school was:
"It’s outrageous and unsettling that the NRA would choose to address gun violence not by taking assault weapons off our streets, but by adding more guns to our schools… That is not the right answer for our society, our schools and most importantly our children."

It appears all our top leading Democrats want gun-toting guards to protect their children, but think it's completely outrageous to suggest that we protect our children in the same way. Their families are more important than ours. Our children are to be left unguarded so that the next slaughter can be used as a political hammer to beat on their opponents while they sleep soundly knowing their children are safe.

Wayne LaPierre and the NRA got it right, and our leading Democrats apparently agree with them when it comes to their own children.

If hypocrisy were a commodity, then the Democrats would have cornered the market.

Newer elementary schools have bullet proof glass in their front doors. And all schools should be mandated to have it. Ask your child what he/she knows about "lockdown" at school. They DO know what to do in the event of lockdown! (Private & Public)

What did Australia do to reduce mass murders?

I also question the statement about arming the teachers in Israel. My brother taught
in Beit Shean, a border town with a history of terrorist intrusions. He was never given
any weapons to carry in his classroom. He did do volunteer guard duty around the town in the evenings carrying a weapon. The threats from terrorists was much greater then compared to the threats in the USA now.

I don't think armed guards are the answer here. Do armed guards in banks prevent
robberies, hostage takings, and killings? I don't think so. The answer lies in gun control both in sales and stiff penalties for homes that don't lock their weapons up.
Putting a muzzle on sales related to violence and more media restrictions would be
the most effective deterent.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/2012/12/16/gun_control_after_connecticut_shooting_could_australia_s_laws_provide_a.html

Interesting that the ever bloviated liberal Michael Moore points out that other liberals don't want to talk about the fact that the Newtown shooter only stopped his killing spree when he knew authorities with guns were on the premises....it doesn't fit the narrative that their liberal media wants to present.

...and MSNBC/NBC liberal news host, David Gregory, is on the hot seat for bringing an empty 30 shell magazine (illegal to possess in D.C.) on Meet the Press after he specifically asked the police if he could display it on t.v.

the police told him that it was illegal to possess this magazine.

Gregory showed it on t.v. anyway..

Should he be arrested like any other citizen in D.C. would if they were caught with one of these or is he above the law because he is a liberal elitist? Being that he's done a lot of excellent coverup work for the Obama administration, i think he will get off.

I haven't heard much talk about the Webster NY shooting that happened a couple of days ago. Seems like the perfect story for liberals to pony up their gun ban parade. My suspicion is that the background on the guy reveals too much of the real problem which fails their symbolic solution. The guy served only 17 years for beating his mom with a hammer, and a judge let him free.

As I post this the poll shows 71% are for more gun control laws. That's a clear majority. Now is a good time to point out the reason we have a Constitution... it's there to guarantee the rights of the minority against the tyranny of the majority.

If only one person chose to own a gun and all the others wanted to take it away, then the Constitution would protect that person's rights and they would keep their gun. That is what it means to be a country of laws, and not merely a country of men.

Now we are being tested. Are we a country of laws?

And NOW Senator Feinstein (D), California, is going to propose new gun control laws to the Senate, including banning some handguns.

These Democrats are not to be trusted. Obama said "no, no, no...we're not coming after your guns"...and got re-elected.

The Associated Press, which is one of the propaganda arms of the administration, has been going overboard with shootings stories lately. Anytime you see a trend of stories on the AP, you can bet that some kind of legislation is coming down the pike.

For the sake of argument, let’s go ahead and ban all private gun ownership. Here is what we get:

According to Time Magazine there are 290,000 people who will lose their jobs.

Next, under the constitution, this would be a taking of private property. The government would be required to purchase the guns from citizens at the fair market value. There are about 310,000,000 guns in the US. It would cost some ½ trillion dollars to administer and buy back all of the guns.

Hunters are the backbone of conservation funding, contributing more than $1 billion each year through the purchase of licenses, permits etc.. Proceeds from the sale of Federal Duck Stamps alone, purchased more than 5 million acres for the National Wildlife Refuge System.

Conservation groups like Ducks Unlimited will no longer exist. They have preserved some 108,569,037 acres of environmentally sensitive habitat. This group is funded by hunters (gun owners).

As far as benefits goes, there is overwhelming evidence that it will not affect crime.

The largest mass murder in the United States was committed with box cutters, not guns (i.e. 09/11). Violent crime in Australia is up 47% since they banned ownership of guns

Alternatives which do not impinge upon issues involving the 1st, 2nd and 5th amendments to the US Constitution do exist. Taking emotion out of the decision making process and start using real facts and figures is the only way we can move towards long term solutions.

Here is a link to an article on how Obama plans to confiscate all the guns in America.
http://www.infowars.com/firearm-confiscation-plan-announced-for-america/

It kinda makes you want to write a check to the NRA.

BAN BULLETS. Make it harder to purchase them other then walking into Dicks and picking up a couple boxes for $10.00

Mac, you obviously didn't read the previous comment from one of your gun loving comrads, who bragged about how Australia's crime rate has increased after banning guns. True or not (it may be one of those crazy internet things like the link one of your other gun lovers posted). I seriously doubt they are going to ever get close to our Crime by gun rate of Number 1. That's my point!

I have read all 176 comments to date. I've nothing left to do except mourn for the future of our country. Following party ideology without the application of any logic or reasoning has left us in a condition similar to 1854-1856. Unfortunately, I fear we will end up repeating our horrible past again.

We may just be #20 in mosquitoes, call Durbin.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_wit_fir-crime-murders-with-firearms

http://t.ritholtz.com/bigpicture/#!/entry/what-perplexes-me-about-gun-deaths-in-the-usa-,50db93d7d7fc7b5670c5043c/1

The U.S. has 10.2 gun related deaths per 100,000, while the next highest is Canada with 4.78 (of countries listed, of course)

McCloud, what happened to Romney's big victory? Your right wing media was wrong about that and they're wrong again on this.

According to the FBI(http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-11) in 2011 there were 8583 murders involving guns in the US. Of those, only 323 involved rifles. Of those, about 100 were "assault" rifles. Banning “assault” weapons will have little or no effect on the crime statistics. It’s just a way for politicians to get votes from uninformed people.

No one is shouting ban the manufacture and sale of cigarettes. The National Cancer Society estimates smokers kill 25,000 people with 2nd hand smoke. The CDC reports more deaths are caused each year by tobacco use than by all deaths from human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), illegal drug use, alcohol use, motor vehicle injuries, suicides, and murders combined. http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/health_effects/tobacco_related_mortality/

I wonder about our priorities.

The problem is not gun laws. There are plenty of them on the books right now. The problem is the gun laws are not being enforced. The Connecticut shooter broke at least 3 laws. All the shooting in Chicago are done by illegal guns. Before any new laws are passed regarding gun control, enforce the laws already on the books. If new laws are then needed, so be it. However, if new laws are not enforced any better than existing laws, it would be a waste of time.

This article presents for and against gun control, so maybe you'll read it, Jerry-

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/14/nine-facts-about-guns-and-mass-shootings-in-the-united-states/

This one is older, but still holds true-

http://www.americanbar.org/groups/committees/gun_violence/resources/the_u_s_compared_to_other_nations.html

More, but will have to be later.

It's obvious the problem is 89 guns for every 100 people in the US. More than any other country. We don't need more guns, we need more laws and enforcement. As someone mentioned, there's a problem in Mexico....ask them where the guns are coming from? Yep, the good ole USA is also the cause of the gun crime in Mexico. We buy their drugs, they buy our guns.

I'm picturing you McCloud sitting around your rundown house in your underwear with a beer in one hand and the remote control in the other watching your favorite republicans on Fox News. Let's take a look at some current and previous fair and balanced commentators, shall we: we've got Sarah Palin-R, Rick Santorum-R, Mike Huckabee-R, Newt Gingrich-R, Karl Rove-R, and I'm sure I'm missing a few. Then we have Roger Ailes, who worked for Nixon, Reagan, and Poppy Bush's campaigns where. whatd'ya know, he was responsible for the Willie Horton ads among other things. Add to that that a good many of the Fox commentators also write for some of the most right wing publications around. Tell me McCloud- does that give you any clue?

Everyone who thinks taking guns from citizens will reduce crime should remember that our very own Federal Government gave over 2,000 assault rifles to Mexican drug cartels, the most vicious killers in the world today... just so they could use dead Mexican bodies as a political prop in their campaign against gun ownership in the US. Sick but true.

The Federal Government has been the biggest violator of gun laws in this country. I trust my neighbor with a gun more than I trust the Federal Government.

Again, I'll take my chances with the Constitution as it is written.

Men and women buy your firearms get your foid. crooks now know you gave up your rights to bear arms. more Burglary and more Burglary. Im in Glenview il and someome was trying to come into my house at 3:30 am, seems they didnt care my lights where on, tv on, my car in front. Alarm set off and police didnt show up till 10 mins by then we all would of been dead. Im no longer waiting for police that why i have the right to bear arms now!